Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Se está descargando tu SlideShare. ×

Vernieuwing van de digitale leeromgeving (DLO) - Frank Snels - HOlink2016

Más Contenido Relacionado

Libros relacionados

Gratis con una prueba de 30 días de Scribd

Ver todo

Audiolibros relacionados

Gratis con una prueba de 30 días de Scribd

Ver todo

Vernieuwing van de digitale leeromgeving (DLO) - Frank Snels - HOlink2016

  1. 1. Frank Snels University Information Manager University Of Twente June 2016 Frank.Snels@utwente.nl DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT TOWARDS A FUTURE PROOF DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIROMENT
  2. 2.  Introduction  Digital Learning Environment (DLE)  Phase 1: current usage (2014)  Phase 2: vision and ambition (2015)  Education of the future  Functional requirements  Support of the DLE  Phase 3: Tender and implementation (2016 - ) 16-6-2016 2 AGENDA
  3. 3. University of Twente 20 juni 2013Onderwijsarchitectuur in de praktijk 3  6 faculties, 4 institutes  10.000 students, 3300 employees  1600 publications, 200 PHD’s,  20 bachelor- , 33 master schools  800 startups  Technical Research University  Green campus University  High tech, human touch  most entrepreneurial university (Meest ondernemende Universiteit)
  4. 4.  Shortcut european tender proces surf contract 5 years ago  Blackboard Surf contract ends for several universities  Goal twente university: better understanding current situation  Activities:  67 Interviews (20 students, 35 scientific, 12 support staff)  UT-workshop (SURF SIG DLWO): 40 participants  Studentenworkshops: 20 participants  Blackboard database insights (1369 courses 2013/2014) 4 PHASE 1: CURRENT USAGE OF THE DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (DLE) DLE an integrated collection of digital services and applications that supports students and teachers in their work LMS: Learning Management Systems like Blackboard, Canvas of Moodle
  5. 5.  SURF survey 2013 (40 participants):  18 NL-HE institutes use Blackboard,  17 use sharepoint  Nationale Studenten Enquete (2014) : score 3,8 (scale 1-5)  UT-evaluation (2013/2014): score 3.5 (scale 1-5)  Courses not using Blackboard: max 8% 5 GENERAL FINDINGS
  6. 6. Adaptive release 54%, mashups:2% grouptools 25%, student signup 14%,  Discussionboard: 4%, blog: 0%, journal: 0%, wiki: -%  Grade center: not to adopt (down/upload: 4%) , ephorus* assignments: 22%, group assignments: 15%  Tests: 3%, surveys: 2% (faculty of ITC 61%) 6 FINDINGS: BLACKBOARD DATABASE ANALYSIS * via Blackboard
  7. 7.  Uniform design and stability are the key aspects for students  1 Learning management system (LMS)  Teachers: Blackboard is user unfriendly and has a steep learning curve  Our teachers are researchers with an education task  Collaboration outside the learning management system  Whatsapp, Dropbox en Google apps are most used for collaboration  Internal support to teachers needs attention  Differences within faculties 7 FINDINGS
  8. 8.  Introduction  Digital Learning Environment (DLE)  Phase 1: current usage (2014)  Phase 2: vision and ambition (2015)  Education of the future  Functional requirements  Support of the DLE  Phase 3: Tender and implementation (2016 - ) 16-6-2016 8 AGENDA
  9. 9. 9 PHASE 2: TOWARDS A FUTURE PROOF DLE Learning goals Learning approaches Digital learning environment Blended learning, with at least four different uses  - Classroom technology  - ‘Flipped’ didactics  - Time and place independent teaching  - Open Educational Resources
  10. 10.  Diversity participant;  Student driven learning / demand pull  Course goals: from knowledge to skills (Research skills, Design skills, Entrepeneurship) 10 EDUCATION CONTEXT Twente Academy Bachelors Masters PDEntr/ DBA PDEng PhD UC Atlas TEM Professional developmentprograms BREADTH DEPTH
  11. 11. Functional requirements Non-functional requirements Overview, insights and Composition of: participants, teachers, groups, coursematerial, facilities, learning goals, competenties and properties from learningactivity, course or module Dataintegration en interoperability Personalisation Visual integration and identitity management FUTURE PROOF DLE: CORE FUNCTIONS
  12. 12. SOURCE: SURF SIG DLWO, “een flexibele en persoonlijke leeromgeving” sept 2015 https://www.surf.nl/binaries/content/assets/surf/en/knowledgebase/2016/memorandum-learning-environment_uk_web.pdf INTEGRATION 12
  13. 13. 13 DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT SUPPORT (1) Didactic Technology Education specialist System engineer Business information management Blackboard key-user Instructional designer
  14. 14. Core “LMS als organizer, integrationplatfor m” Reccomended “b.v. peer feedback, digital assesment, voting, video(Camtasia) ” Optional “Virtual classroom, forum, socrative, online courses” Pilot “USB assesments, MOOC” Expected usage form all teachers and staff. central finance and support. Reccomended, central finance and support. Fully integration with core Is optional, Facyulty or school finance and support. Integration with core is optional. New features. Project based Finance and support Public features without support or finance. Openbare integratie Public “Whatsapp, dropbox, hangouts, facebook,” DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT SUPPORT (2) 14
  15. 15. 15 PHASE 3: TENDER AND IMPLEMENTATION (1)  Tender 2016, implementation 2017 –  Proces: best value and traditional  support improvement is seperate project  Faculty involvement  Roadshows  Usability tests  Core functionality Tender <-> LMS Tender ?  Frontrunners shows traditional LMS players
  16. 16. LMS tender (2016) 16 PHASE 3: TENDER AND IMPLEMENTATION (2)
  17. 17. Questions 17

Notas del editor

  • 17

×